Ummmm.....this post definitely has something to do with the civil war.

Originally Posted by Travlyr

For the Southern Confederacy it was definitely about slavery. Read what the Southern states declare in their own secession statements. They claim to secede from the Union in order to "preserve the blessings of African slavery." Lincoln believed he only had the Constitutional authority to end slavery in Washington D.C. and he did free the slaves in D.C. in 1862. These are their words... not mine.

"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul

Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.

Originally Posted by osan

The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

Lincoln might not have been fighting to stop slavery but the south sure AS HELL WASN't fighting for the right of people to leave a union and were fighting to perserve slavery.

True dat. Both sides sucked. And these arguments that people feel so passionately about do nothing IMO to advance the cause of liberty. Seriously talking about 9/11 being an inside job makes more sense. The Patriot Act and these wars can directly be traced to 9/11. I can't fathom anyone who truly understands the depth of the deception on 9/11 supporting the wars and the Patriot Act and the NDAA. But I meet people all the time on both sides of the civil war / pro - anti Lincoln / (and pro - anti MLK for that matter) divide who support the wars and the Patriot Act and the NDAA. That said, yall are having so much fun. No need for me to spoil it.

"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul

Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.

Originally Posted by osan

The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

Ummmm.....this post definitely has something to do with the civil war.

Anyway, yall are having fun. Carry on.

But jmdrake. I strongly believe that I have the right to defend myself at all times. The intention of the OP was to share what Lincoln said about National Banks. When "itshappening" introduced the Civil War issue into the thread, should I have just ignored his nonsense? What would you have done?

This is the most interesting and knowledgeable response in this thread. Now, I have study to do, and I will respond after I do my research. While it is not a big deal in the timeline ... Lincoln did not enter the Senate in 1858.

But jmdrake. I strongly believe that I have the right to defend myself at all times. The intention of the OP was to share what Lincoln said about National Banks. When "itshappening" introduced the Civil War issue into the thread, should I have just ignored his nonsense? What would you have done?

Hey, I ain't mad bro! As long as you're having fun it's all good. That said, if I post a thread with the words "Abraham Lincoln" in the title I wouldn't have to be psychic to know where it's headed, especially on this forum.

"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"

"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul

"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul

Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. No need to make it a superhighway.

Originally Posted by osan

The only way I see Trump as likely to affect any real change would be through martial law, and that has zero chances of success without strong buy-in by the JCS at the very minimum.

Hey, I ain't mad bro! As long as you're having fun it's all good. That said, if I post a thread with the words "Abraham Lincoln" in the title I wouldn't have to be psychic to know where it's headed, especially on this forum.

LOL... okay. But the truth be known... Abraham Lincoln was a peaceful man. Unfortunately, he was elected president in early November 1860, and the Southern leaders knew he was man of principle who would honor his word. He had to wait nearly four months after being elected to swear the oath of office. The South seceded. The Civil War was started before he even got to Washington. So you are right, anything with Lincoln's name in the title is about the Civil War even though Lincoln never wanted to fight anyone. His National Bank idea, prior to the Civil War, was an audited National Bank in order to promote commerce through consistent currency. If anyone doubts his intentions, then please read the OP and respond.

This is the most interesting and knowledgeable response in this thread. Now, I have study to do, and I will respond after I do my research. While it is not a big deal in the timeline ... Lincoln did not enter the Senate in 1858.

You are correct. My bad. Threw that timeline together too fast. In 1858 he won the GOP nod for US Senate in Illinois, but had to face Douglas, and lost.

(Edit: Corrected the timeline.)

Last edited by Brian4Liberty; 12-27-2012 at 09:17 PM.

Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

This is the most interesting and knowledgeable response in this thread. Now, I have study to do, and I will respond after I do my research. While it is not a big deal in the timeline ... Lincoln did not enter the Senate in 1858.

Also, you may want to check out the following thread about Lincoln and Marxism. I am pretty new to the entire Lincoln debate, and only started studying it this month. Thank Steven Spielberg for that, as several people had asked me about the Lincoln movie, which required some research on my part before giving any answers. The Marx connection was a rabbit hole that I followed, and found very interesting, mostly due to it's 1984-style erasure from history.

Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

LOL... okay. But the truth be known... Abraham Lincoln was a peaceful man. Unfortunately, he was elected president in early November 1860, and the Southern leaders knew he was man of principle who would honor his word. He had to wait nearly four months after being elected to swear the oath of office. The South seceded. The Civil War was started before he even got to Washington. So you are right, anything with Lincoln's name in the title is about the Civil War even though Lincoln never wanted to fight anyone. His National Bank idea, prior to the Civil War, was an audited National Bank in order to promote commerce through consistent currency. If anyone doubts his intentions, then please read the OP and respond.

A lot of people claim to know what was in historical figures' heads like this, including Lincoln and various southern and northern folks. Query: how do you know what these people were thinking? This sort of tactic is typical of hagiographers, not serious historians.

Originally Posted by Torchbearer

what works can never be discussed online. there is only one language the government understands, and until the people start speaking it by the magazine full... things will remain the same.

I don't think it had anything to do with Marx. Lincoln started advocating for the National bank in 1832 after Henry Clay gave his three day speech in congress on the "American System."

I also had to read about the "American System". Interesting stuff.

the plan "consisted of three mutually reinforcing parts: a tariff to protect and promote American industry; a national bank to foster commerce; and federal subsidies for roads, canals, and other 'internal improvements' to develop profitable markets for agriculture."

I must say, it's very mild stuff compared to what we actually have today. If that was all government did, it would be a vast improvement.

My thoughts:

- Tariff: As a lesser of evils option, a flat, low, across the board tariff is preferable to all other taxes. It creates the least paperwork/enforcement burden, and is Constitutional.

- National bank: It would be best if they only produced gold and silver coin for the Congress, as the Constitution specifies. If a "debt-free" money, issued by the government is part of this plan, then it is preferable to the Federal Reserve System of Debt Dealers we have today. A National fiat currency would be rather harmless, as long as there are competing currencies, no legal tender laws, no price fixing, and no fixed exchange rates. In that situation, only government employees or contractors would have to accept a National fiat currency, as part of their employment contract. Obviously businesses would probably also accept it too, but the purchasing power and exchange rates would depend on market forces, and how responsible the National Bank was with it's debt-free currency.

- Public roads. That is more of a slippery slope issue. Before modern electronics were created, tolls were a royal pain. Good roads are a benefit. As far as paying for roads, it should be a local issue (town, city, county, maybe State). Not Federal. And public/private partnerships are a scam. Either it's public, or it's private. None of this "socializing costs", "privatizing profits" nonsense.

Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

Ah Jimminy Crickets! YAPCWT. (Yet another pointless civil war thread). It's pointless because each side is so freaking hell bent on proving their side "right" that few, if any, are willing to see that both sides were wrong.
...
That out of the way, I leave you to your regularly scheduled Lincoln admires vs Lincoln haters slugfest.

That's always been my take on it too. It's very politically charged, with so many different interpretations, hidden meanings and agendas, and misconceptions of all kinds, it's hardly worth talking about and kind of pointless. It's also been put through the Ministry of Truth Historical Revision process so many times it's hard to separate fact from fiction.

Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

Isn't it though? It all begins to make sense when looking at it from their viewpoint rather than ours.

Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty

I must say, it's very mild stuff compared to what we actually have today. If that was all government did, it would be a vast improvement.

My thoughts:

- Tariff: As a lesser of evils option, a flat, low, across the board tariff is preferable to all other taxes. It creates the least paperwork/enforcement burden, and is Constitutional.

- National bank: It would be best if they only produced gold and silver coin for the Congress, as the Constitution specifies. If a "debt-free" money, issued by the government is part of this plan, then it is preferable to the Federal Reserve System of Debt Dealers we have today. A National fiat currency would be rather harmless, as long as there are competing currencies, no legal tender laws, no price fixing, and no fixed exchange rates. In that situation, only government employees or contractors would have to accept a National fiat currency, as part of their employment contract. Obviously businesses would probably also accept it too, but the purchasing power and exchange rates would depend on market forces, and how responsible the National Bank was with it's debt-free currency.

- Public roads. That is more of a slippery slope issue. Before modern electronics were created, tolls were a royal pain. Good roads are a benefit. As far as paying for roads, it should be a local issue (town, city, county, maybe State). Not Federal. And public/private partnerships are a scam. Either it's public, or it's private. None of this "socializing costs", "privatizing profits" nonsense.

True enough. A government like Lincoln was advocating was virtually benign. Interestingly enough it was Thomas Jefferson who authorized the first national road through the Cumberland Gap.

I also had to read about the "American System". Interesting stuff.- National bank: It would be best if they only produced gold and silver coin for the Congress, as the Constitution specifies. If a "debt-free" money, issued by the government is part of this plan, then it is preferable to the Federal Reserve System of Debt Dealers we have today. A National fiat currency would be rather harmless, as long as there are competing currencies, no legal tender laws, no price fixing, and no fixed exchange rates. In that situation, only government employees or contractors would have to accept a National fiat currency, as part of their employment contract. Obviously businesses would probably also accept it too, but the purchasing power and exchange rates would depend on market forces, and how responsible the National Bank was with it's debt-free currency.

If you think the establishment of a national bank is workable and will ever adhere to the tenants you outlined, you're sorely mistaken. A national bank is simply another appendage of the state, and a very powerful one at that. Since it is just another appendage of the state, it is fully open to co-option by private capitalists for their own purposes. You get an inflationary monetary policy as a direct result of the elite corporate class taking over government by electing their stooge politicians who funnel treasury loot directly to them. It's the monetary policy that allows them to do so even as real limits are placed on government spending by a gold standard. Hence why all of the protocols you outlined would eliminated.

LOL... okay. But the truth be known... Abraham Lincoln was a peaceful man. Unfortunately, he was elected president in early November 1860, and the Southern leaders knew he was man of principle who would honor his word. He had to wait nearly four months after being elected to swear the oath of office. The South seceded. The Civil War was started before he even got to Washington. So you are right, anything with Lincoln's name in the title is about the Civil War even though Lincoln never wanted to fight anyone. His National Bank idea, prior to the Civil War, was an audited National Bank in order to promote commerce through consistent currency. If anyone doubts his intentions, then please read the OP and respond.

He was such a peaceful man, if he was alive today he would've won a Nobel Peace Prize like BHO. Here are some of his notable achievements:
- Shut down 300 opposition newspapers.
- Suspended habeas corpus (illegally)
- Imprisoned tens of thousands of political dissenters in hell-hole prisons like Fort McHenry and Fort Lafayette
- Deported outspoken Democratic congressman Clement Vallandigham of Ohio.
- Censored telegraphs.
- Intimidated judges.
- Lincoln issued an arrest warrant for Chief Justice Roger Taney who said his suspension of habeas corpus was unconstitutional.
- Lincoln placed sentries outside the home of a federal judge in Washington D.C. who issued a writ of habeas corpus to a man detained by the D.C. Provost Marshal so the judge couldn’t preside over his hearing.
- Conscripted soldiers
- Recruited foreign immigrants to fight in the war
- Abolished the independent treasury system, was the first one to nationalize the money supply.

No wonder neo-cons and leftists love Lincoln so much. He had just as much respect for the US Constitution and the founding principals of this country as they do.

He was such a peaceful man, if he was alive today he would've won a Nobel Peace Prize like BHO. Here are some of his notable achievements:
- Shut down 300 opposition newspapers.
- Suspended habeas corpus (illegally)
- Imprisoned tens of thousands of political dissenters in hell-hole prisons like Fort McHenry and Fort Lafayette
- Deported outspoken Democratic congressman Clement Vallandigham of Ohio.
- Censored telegraphs.
- Intimidated judges.
- Lincoln issued an arrest warrant for Chief Justice Roger Taney who said his suspension of habeas corpus was unconstitutional.
- Lincoln placed sentries outside the home of a federal judge in Washington D.C. who issued a writ of habeas corpus to a man detained by the D.C. Provost Marshal so the judge couldn’t preside over his hearing.
- Conscripted soldiers
- Recruited foreign immigrants to fight in the war
- Abolished the independent treasury system, was the first one to nationalize the money supply.

No wonder neo-cons and leftists love Lincoln so much. He had just as much respect for the US Constitution and the founding principals of this country as they do.

Do you believe that Lincoln went to Washington with that agenda in mind? Can you cite any aggressive act Lincoln ever initiated against any human being prior to the Southern Confederacy bombardment of Fort Sumter?

Just for the record, I do not agree with Lincoln's National Bank. I posted his speech to prove that Lincoln's National Bank is not the same as the international banker's "Federal Reserve System" of counterfeiting money and debasing currency.

If you think the establishment of a national bank is workable and will ever adhere to the tenants you outlined, you're sorely mistaken. A national bank is simply another appendage of the state, and a very powerful one at that. Since it is just another appendage of the state, it is fully open to co-option by private capitalists for their own purposes. You get an inflationary monetary policy as a direct result of the elite corporate class taking over government by electing their stooge politicians who funnel treasury loot directly to them. It's the monetary policy that allows them to do so even as real limits are placed on government spending by a gold standard. Hence why all of the protocols you outlined would eliminated.

Nothing is perfect. Corruption always exists and always will. This is nothing new. There is no system or lack of system that will prevent corruption. "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."

Competing currencies is a better option, and I prefer gold and silver coin.

To say that "competing currencies" is a bad option because powerful interests will co-opt it is redundant. They will try, and if they are successful, then you no longer have competing currencies, by definition.

Twitter: B4Liberty@USAB4L"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Corporate-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul

The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.

Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this site is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.